Hart v. Wexford Healthcare Provider et al

3:25-cv-01920Ilsd9 de jan. de 2026

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DEON L. HART, Y43644, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	)
)
WEXFORD HEALTHCARE 	)
PROVIDER, 	)
DARREN D. GALLOWAY, 	)
JOHN DOE 1, 	) 	Case No. 25-cv-1920-DWD
DAVID A. DEAN, 	)
JANE DOE 1, 	)
SGT. DILLMAN, 	)
BRITTANY P. GREENE, 	)
LT. GENENBACHER, 	)
JOHN DOE 2, 	)
JANE DOE 2, 	)
JOHN DOE 3, 	)
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DUGAN, District Judge:
On October 17, 2025, the Court received Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1), and it
ordered him to pay the $405.00 filing fee or apply to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 4).
On November 24, 2025, Plaintiff was notified that he still had an obligation to pay the fee
or apply to proceed in forma pauperis, failing which this case would be dismissed for
failure to prosecute. 	(Doc. 8). 	Plaintiff has not responded to these Orders and has not
filed anything since filing the complaint and motion for counsel. It appears that Plaintiff
has simply abandoned this case, given his lack of communication with the Court. 	If a
Plaintiff abandons a case or fails to follow a Court order, the case may be subject to
Case 3:25-cv-01920-DWD Document 9 Filed 01/09/26 Page 1 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>
dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); James v. McDonald’s Corp., 417 F.3d 672, 681 (7th Cir. 2005)
(under Rule 41(b) a court has authority to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute if a
party does not provide a timely response to a court order).
Given that Plaintiff has abandoned this case, the Court now finds it appropriate to
dismiss this matter for failure to prosecute. This matter is dismissed with prejudice for
Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute, however, this dismissal does not count as a strike under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff’s Motion for Recruitment of Counsel (Doc. 2) is DENIED as
MOOT. The Clerk is also DIRECTED to enter judgment and to CLOSE this case.
Furthermore, despite the dismissal, Plaintiff remains obligated to pay the full filing
fee of $405.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The agency having custody of the
plaintiff is directed to remit the $405.00 filing fee from his prison trust fund account if
such funds are available. If he does not have $405.00 in his account, the agency must send
an initial payment of 20% of the current balance or the average balance during the past
six months, whichever amount is higher. Thereafter, the agency shall begin forwarding
monthly payments of 20% of the preceding month's income credited to Plaintiff's trust
fund account (including all deposits to the inmate account from any source) until the
statutory fee of $405.00 is paid in its entirety. The agency having custody of Plaintiff shall
forward payments from Plaintiff's account to the Clerk of Court each time the Plaintiff's
account exceeds $10.00 until the $405.00 filing fee is paid. Payments shall be mailed to:
Clerk of the Court, United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. The
Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the Trust Fund Officer Western
Correctional Center.
Case 3:25-cv-01920-DWD Document 9 Filed 01/09/26 Page 2 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 9, 2026
/s/ David W. Dugan
_________________________
DAVID W. DUGAN
United States District Judge
Case 3:25-cv-01920-DWD Document 9 Filed 01/09/26 Page 3 of 3 Page ID
#<pageID>

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.